Forum:Minifigure categories
I think the Mos needs a few updates relating to what should and what should not be added by way of categories, regarding Minifigures and parts, where they appear in quite a lot of themes, The 2 x 4 brick for example which has appeared in almost every theme since its introduction can at this stage, have quite a lot of themes added in the categories (not sure if it has been done), In my opinion this is just way to messy and unnecessary. The appearance section will show any user what themes it has appeared in. Minifigures are also an example of this over use of categories, The skeleton for example , as it is, all variations appear on the one single page and as such can be added to many themes, which again in my opinion is just messy. I don't like the Minifigures not being separated by way of uniqueness, most are slightly different from each other and with other Minifigures, variations are on separate pages. So to sum up , The Mos perhaps needs to be clearer on what categories to add for parts and Minifigures, and Minifigures should have their own page for each unique one there is. Just throwing ideas at you and want your opinion on this. cheers Gladiatoring 06:23, September 9, 2010 (UTC) * I completely agree on the idea about the parts categories- it's just not really necessary to have parts in theme categories. Maybe if they're exclusive to the theme, but even that can look a bit messy. The unique minifigures idea would be a big change to the wiki, I'd need to think about it for a while before I gave an opinion on this. But, I was wondering how you thought we should name these minifigures (for ones which aren't named) if this would go ahead- would it be something like "Farmer 1", "Farmer 2", etc? 07:30, September 9, 2010 (UTC) :: Naming is the hard part, Ive been thinking about this for some time now and still to provide a solution even to myself. Looking at the way it is done on Bricklink with separation into theme then a number as in twn115 for one of the Farmers then followed by a description "Overalls Farmer Green, Red Cap", does separate them fairly well, but besides the catalog code which the numbers can go into their hundreds, the descriptions can be long. Maybe separating the Minifigures further into sub-themes and then a description for the name as in; Town : Airport : Pilot with Red Tie and 6 Buttons, White Legs, Black Ponytail Hair, Standard Grin. But this is what I mean by being to long. But as far as I can see this may be the only way to separate each unique minifigure. One other idea that comes to mind is to add either original set number or year of release of the minifigure title; Farmer 1 (2008) or Farmer (7634). I know this isn't really helpful and also aware this will be a big change to the wiki and take a lot of work, But I do think it is possible (once naming issues are worked through) and necessary to do this, when we are everything about LEGO and Minifigures are a huge part of any collectors, collection. Gladiatoring 08:20, September 9, 2010 (UTC) :::For figures like licensed, would it include the background info for the whole thing or that variant? If so, how would the current page work, (like the GA or FA ones) would they be like a central hub? ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 16:14, September 9, 2010 (UTC) : The Licensed themes I think will be a bit easier, Yes a central hub with background of the character then pages leading to each variant, and on that page, the background ect. will reflect that Minifigure only, I guess basically the scenes from the movie it appears in, In cases where the Minifigure is only a slight variation the background can remain the same pretty much, but emphasis on the change to the Minifigure and appearances. Perhaps Minifigures like Indiana Jones and Darth Vader can remain as they are if need be, but ones like the Skeleton where the variation in most if not all cases only appears in one theme (except the original) and often only one or two sets. Gladiatoring 01:07, September 10, 2010 (UTC) :Hmm.. Whats others (who haven't commenteds) thoughts and ideas here? ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 09:16, September 11, 2010 (UTC) I'm not sure.... 12:33, September 11, 2010 (UTC) :Also, the current stratergy for unnamed/standard figures, to put on Person may cause problems in the future with 300 images loading. XD ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 11:10, September 12, 2010 (UTC) :: Yes good point CjC, When I think of set xxxx with Anakin then linking to a page with that sets version of Anakin , thats a lot better than going straight to the hub page listing all variants. Going to that particular version seems to make more sense in what I want to see, and a link on that page to the hub (listing all variants ect). Gladiatoring 11:39, September 12, 2010 (UTC) Well, i haven't mocked up a non-licensed figure yet, but here is an example of Anakin. User:Kingcjc/Clone Wars Anakin and User:Kingcjc/AnakinSkywalker. Me and Glad have discussed this a bit and although their are still a few things to iron out if this is to go through, i feel it will give more space to discuss about the indiviual figure, the parts used and give people more specific information. Plus it stops Person become a massive gallery of 300 images... ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 13:24, September 12, 2010 (UTC) Just trying to revive this forum a bit, since it's a pretty vital change being discussed here. I've been thinking about it for a while, and I strongly support the splitting for minifigures, provided we can have some sort of naming system for them (maybe just "Anakin Skywalker 01", "Anakin Skywalker 02", etc. in order of release?). Having a separate article for each variant would also make it easier for knowing which image to put in for the minifigure galleries (just use the infobox image of the appropriate minifigure). The only thing I wouldn't be sure on would be- how detailed do we get? For example, the TIE Pilot: * 7146 TIE Fighter- Brown head, no dull silver helmet/torso printing, large amount of black on belt * 4479 TIE Bomber- Brown head, shiny silver helmet/torso printing, smaller amount of black on belt * 6206 TIE Interceptor- Black head, shiny printing, smaller amount of black on belt than 4479 * 7659 Imperial Landing Craft- As above, and smaller amount of black on belt than 6206. Grey printing may be slightly different, but not completely sure * 8087 TIE Defender- Major redesign 00:43, November 6, 2010 (UTC) : This seems to be a solution to me, A short description of the Minifigure included in the article name to separate variations. Easy enough to do with figures like this, Some more thought perhaps in what to call the farmer from 2006 as compared to the farmer from 2008 for example, where the minifigures primary function is the same but they look very different. Any Ideas on how to separate common town minifigures like this ? Please add your comments below. Gladiatoring 19:49, November 7, 2010 (UTC) ::Many of these seem to be one set ones (it seems), so for the majority would Policeman (7289) or Farmer (7263) work? (numbers made up by the way) ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 19:54, November 7, 2010 (UTC) : Yeah I don't mind the set number in brackets after the name, fine for unique minifigures that are included in only one set, The problem still exists for minifigures that appear in multiple sets, and may have multiple roles, such as the 1980's minifigures who appeared as workers in a Police or Fire station, or Hospital ect... And so this way we would have minifigures like Farmer (7900} and then other minifigure titles that dont have the brackets. If that matters at all. Gladiatoring 20:01, November 7, 2010 (UTC) ::Yeah, they are a pain. We can't exactly put first year or something in their brackets, as people would think they were the set numbers :/. Suppose we could get some sort of theme title or something (im not sure as i dont really know these ones.) Eg. Policeman (Four Button suit) (that sounds awful)... or something in that vain ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 20:11, November 7, 2010 (UTC) :::Can we update the categories? We need to change minifigure to Minifigure. 13:21, November 10, 2010 (UTC) :::It was voted that we are going to lowercase minifigure. Lego lord 23:22, February 27, 2011 (UTC)